“To those who feel we should not address this as an organization because it is too controversial, I would ask: Did we shy away from fighting discrimination against AIDS patients in the early days of that epidemic, even though much of society stigmatized those with HIV? No, we let science lead us. Did we mute our opposition to smoking because Big Tobacco defended it? No, we let science lead us. And even now, have we backed away from our support on universal vaccinations or the gains made through the Affordable Care Act because they’re controversial? No, we’ve let science lead us.

“So similarly, I would submit to you that the AMA must not back down from addressing gun violence. <applause>

“On the contrary, we must address it head on, scientifically, in an evidence-based, principled fashion, and with the health and safety of our communities, our fellow Americans, and our children as our chief concern.

“While we will not all agree on every proposal introduced on gun violence, we can all agree that this issue must be addressed. And that the only way—the only responsible way—forward is for women and men of good faith to continue to search for and advocate for science-based solutions.”

Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers.